• NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    14 hours ago

    A “true” believer therefore has a moral imperative of destroying diversity in order to protect other people.

    I mean they have a moral imperative to try within whatever limits their interpretation of the religion imposes, but that’s it. It’s not like these religions imply, say, putting followers of other religions in reeducation camps. One can fully operate in a diverse society while still thinking “I’m right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to this thing,” for the same reason having political opinions isn’t mutually exclusive with diversity. BTW Islam =/= Islamism. The former is a religion; the latter is a political ideology based on the religion.

    • ViatorOmnium@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      When you believe that if someone disagrees with you they are going to be tortured for eternity, burning books sounds a lot like a lesser evil.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Again, you’re assuming that this belief exists in a vacuum and not as part of an elaborate belief system with clauses specifically meant to address this. Besides, your average leftist believes that if you (well society at large more like) disagree with them millions if not billions of people will be condemned to lifelong poverty for generations. The scale is a bit smaller than eternal damnation, but really this is just how it goes when you have strong/high-stakes opinions about anything.